Why no D day in 1943?

Discussions on WW2 in Western Europe & the Atlantic.
ChristopherPerrien
Member
Posts: 7047
Joined: 26 Dec 2002 00:58
Location: Mississippi

Re: Why no D day in 1943?

Post by ChristopherPerrien » 29 Jan 2016 21:17

Tom from Cornwall wrote:Hi Christopher,

I quite agree that there is still much to learn about WW2, perhaps we just disagree on historical method. I would be more than happy if you started all your posts with "In my opinion..." just so that anyone idly searching for historical evidence about WW2 doesn't end up being persuaded that your posts are based on any newly discovered trove of primary sources.
Regards

Tom
"Persuaded" ? I am not trying to persuade anyone. I am hoping that "anyone idly searching for historical evidence about WW2" goes back and looks at "primary sources" and decides for themselves. And that "reading between the lines" and looking for "hidden or unmentioned motivations' and remembering "context" are important when studying any sources of historical events and persons involved rather than dogmatic acceptance of what is on any page.

Note: The "in my opinion" suggestion, is actually redundant this case. I started my first comment about Dieppe, with "AFAIAC", which means "as far as I am concerned". Which by default is an opinion and also implies caveats.

Tom from Cornwall
Member
Posts: 2623
Joined: 01 May 2006 19:52
Location: UK

Re: Why no D day in 1943?

Post by Tom from Cornwall » 30 Jan 2016 12:05

Christopher,
I am not trying to persuade anyone.
Really? Didn't you say:
AFAIAC, it would have worked and I won the debate.

That is the truth why Round-up did not occur in the summer of 1943.

I hope my topic pops up then and somebody mentions/footnotes me. Who knows?

Don't think Churchill and the British high command were beyond getting a few thousand "colonials", or even English commoners, killed to create an example.

"Ain't it the truth".
:roll:

Still no evidence though... :welcome:

Regards

Tom

ChristopherPerrien
Member
Posts: 7047
Joined: 26 Dec 2002 00:58
Location: Mississippi

Re: Why no D day in 1943?

Post by ChristopherPerrien » 30 Jan 2016 14:14

Now I remember , you pulled this same trolling crap before, years ago. Think of something original rather than pulling stuff out of your context.

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 9491
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Why no D day in 1943?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 31 Jan 2016 11:59

Hi Christophe,

Certainly the Canadians were "colonials", but had had a growing degree of autonomy since 1867. It took them a week to declare war after the UK. It was not automatic. What is your point?

You write, "Using Canadians at the time and have them suffer some casualties actually served a purpose to bring Canada more into the war by suffering casualties". Previous losses at Hong Kong had the reverse effect and the Canadians declined to garrison the Falkland Islands as a result.

The losses at Dieppe also led Canada to introduce conscription, which was divisive because the French Canadians were much less accepting of it.

I agree that the use of experienced troops would have been better, but where to get them from? Most of the British Army at home had only about three weeks combat experience before Dunkirk (all of it negative), or none at all. The Canadians were therefore not much different from other available units. The fact that after three years of war they were the only major Commonwealth army to have seen no action tends (1) to belie your proposition that the British were inclined to use them as cannon fodder and, (2), I would suggest, rather pushes them to the top of the list for use.

You write, "There is also the fact they were not English, and were landing on France. Much the same as American troops landed during Torch. Not a good idea to antagonize French/Vichy feelings at the time." As it was a raid, not an invasion, French sentiment is irrelevant.

Cheers,

Sid.

Delta Tank
Member
Posts: 2340
Joined: 16 Aug 2004 01:51
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Why no D day in 1943?

Post by Delta Tank » 31 May 2021 16:17

Sheldrake wrote:
09 Nov 2015 02:06
Carl Schwamberger wrote:
ChristopherPerrien wrote: ... But hey, they still believe the British POV that infests the history books/green books and colors many of the issues about it. Hard to change that. Might crack it though. As I state and stated back then,

...
Its not even a consistent or unified British PoV. While Dill was CIGS there were a number of staff studies and plans prepared for retiring to Europe/France in 1942. Post 1944 Monty is supposed to have remarked that delaying the invasion until 1944 was a mistake.

2. Monty said a lot of things to annoy people. He also really despised COSSAC - Sir Frederick Morgan.

Sheldrake,

Why did Monty despise SirFrederick Morgan?

Delta Tank
Member
Posts: 2340
Joined: 16 Aug 2004 01:51
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Why no D day in 1943?

Post by Delta Tank » 31 May 2021 16:24

ChristopherPerrien wrote:
08 Nov 2015 21:21
Aber wrote:
ChristopherPerrien wrote:
john2 wrote:Sorry if this has been brought up before. I know an invasion in 1942 was not possible because the US had just entered the war but I haven't heard any good reasons there was no attempt in '43.
Back in the day; 24 pages of going there 8-)

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... t=round+up
Are you still mad about it? :D
Not as much as I was when it started Aber. AFAIAC, it would have worked and I won the debate. In short-

Churchill wanted the Med in 1943, so Operation Husky happened instead. That is the truth why Round-up did not occur in the summer of 1943.

IIRC< When it got to the point that I said no panthers got to France in 1943. Because it was brought up about the Germans getting armor to the beachhead at some point in time. Mind you Round-Up would have landed in July-Aug 1943 timeframe. And finally some yahoo(no offense) said 150 Panthers, got to France in DECEMBER !(@#$&) 1943, I just gave up then on furthering the debate, to win more points of contention in favor of Round-up.

Anyway, pretty sure those were the D model worn out/rejects from Russia. But even if they weren't, Round-up in the historical would have landed on the beach, and got off the beach, even with all the skeptics here. Given the historical minor German forces/opposition(they had few units to move and could move to France in 1943) and no Atlantic Wall (wasn't built then). Even with the historical pro gnome POV problem, and even with some of the actual force involved sitting on the beach drinking tea(Patton's aid not me*). :lol:.

We had enough force and firepower. We had enough air support to win air superiority over the beaches in the landing and then over France by moving air units. And there was enough lift for the units and logistical support in July/August(witness Op Husky). We had the U-boat problem beat in May 43 (historically true :wink: ) If the Germans were gonna fight the Allies somewhere in France or the SiegFried Line in December 1943 :roll: .Oh well, then it proves , Round-up would have worked.

Kudos to Rich for giving the best fire support in real figures on the issue. He shot up a lot of my propositions. But the figs he provided usually gave lie favorable to the points I was trying to make. Which was what I was trying to do, by suckering him in, in the first place. :wink: . If you want hard hard figs on landing in France in WWII, or a lot of accurate info on WWII or other militaria stuff like tanks and such, Rich is one of the best historians in the world. We are lucky to have him and I was and am honored that he stoops down to debate here and provide info. Soundboarding goes boths ways, I figure. :thumbsup:

Overall, I am happy for the end result. :D , Am I still mad? Of course :lol: , but I am more sad than mad because I failed to convince a lot of skeptics. But hey, they still believe the British POV that infests the history books/green books and colors many of the issues about it. Hard to change that. Might crack it though. As I state and stated back then,

Churchill wanted the Med in 1943, so Operation Husky happened, that is the basic reason why Round-up did not occur in 1943.

It fits in the historical, and answers a-lot of questions. Round up was operationally and logistically possible and would have worked. Kudos to all who participated back then. Wish I could do the work and research to write the book, because that topic and debate is only the tip of Iceberg :wink: , and was really messy; But that is now impossible for me to do. Somebody else may 100 years down the road. I hope my topic pops up then and somebody mentions/footnotes me. Who knows?

Regards to all ,
Chris

*(actual-IIRC , "If The British don't get off the beach soon , They'll have grass and limpets growing up one leg")
Chris,
Dr. Jim Lacey wrote the book below and in that book he states that the US Army was not going to have enough trained divisions to do Operation Roundup in 1943. Sure, we would have enough divisions to do the invasion, but not enough to do the mission which was to defeat Germany.
https://www.amazon.com/Keep-All-Thought ... 1591144914

Mike

User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 3102
Joined: 28 Apr 2013 17:14
Location: London

Re: Why no D day in 1943?

Post by Sheldrake » 31 May 2021 21:13

Delta Tank wrote:
31 May 2021 16:17
Sheldrake wrote:
09 Nov 2015 02:06
Carl Schwamberger wrote:
ChristopherPerrien wrote: ... But hey, they still believe the British POV that infests the history books/green books and colors many of the issues about it. Hard to change that. Might crack it though. As I state and stated back then,

...
Its not even a consistent or unified British PoV. While Dill was CIGS there were a number of staff studies and plans prepared for retiring to Europe/France in 1942. Post 1944 Monty is supposed to have remarked that delaying the invasion until 1944 was a mistake.

2. Monty said a lot of things to annoy people. He also really despised COSSAC - Sir Frederick Morgan.

Sheldrake,

Why did Monty despise SirFrederick Morgan?
Montgomery was a nasty four letter word and would discredit people whose contributions might compete with his own. Morgan was COSSAC under whose direction much of the planning for Op Overlord had taken place. Montgomery dismissed the plan as rubbish and derided Morgan, even though most of the plan was as prepared by Morgan.

Frederick Morgan knew Montgomery

Delta Tank
Member
Posts: 2340
Joined: 16 Aug 2004 01:51
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Why no D day in 1943?

Post by Delta Tank » 01 Jun 2021 12:54

Sheldrake wrote:
31 May 2021 21:13
Delta Tank wrote:
31 May 2021 16:17
Sheldrake wrote:
09 Nov 2015 02:06
Carl Schwamberger wrote:
ChristopherPerrien wrote: ... But hey, they still believe the British POV that infests the history books/green books and colors many of the issues about it. Hard to change that. Might crack it though. As I state and stated back then,

...
Its not even a consistent or unified British PoV. While Dill was CIGS there were a number of staff studies and plans prepared for retiring to Europe/France in 1942. Post 1944 Monty is supposed to have remarked that delaying the invasion until 1944 was a mistake.

2. Monty said a lot of things to annoy people. He also really despised COSSAC - Sir Frederick Morgan.

Sheldrake,

Why did Monty despise SirFrederick Morgan?
Montgomery was a nasty four letter word and would discredit people whose contributions might compete with his own. Morgan was COSSAC under whose direction much of the planning for Op Overlord had taken place. Montgomery dismissed the plan as rubbish and derided Morgan, even though most of the plan was as prepared by Morgan.

Frederick Morgan knew Montgomery
Sheldrake,
I knew that Monty derided the plan just didn’t understand why, but now I do. Under the constraints given to Morgan and his planning staff, I thought they did a pretty good job. They picked the correct location for the invasion, that was critical.

Thanks

Mike

ChristopherPerrien
Member
Posts: 7047
Joined: 26 Dec 2002 00:58
Location: Mississippi

Re: Why no D day in 1943?

Post by ChristopherPerrien » 02 Jul 2021 14:13

Delta Tank wrote:

Chris,
Dr. Jim Lacey wrote the book below and in that book he states that the US Army was not going to have enough trained divisions to do Operation Roundup in 1943. Sure, we would have enough divisions to do the invasion, but not enough to do the mission which was to defeat Germany.
https://www.amazon.com/Keep-All-Thought ... 1591144914

Mike
Hi Delta Tank

It has now been years , since I gave any thought to Military History , WWII , etc, and I do not know of this Jim Lacey. I try to check it/him out.

Anywhoo , it is/was not a matter of the US and UK , defeating Germany, Russia did that (with alot of US/UK Lend/Lease (free) Help.
It would have been a matter of using what we had and what was in the pipeline to land in France and advance , and take over France against scant German Forces at the the time. MAY-JUL 43 while the Germans were throwing evrything at Kursk. The Germans would had had to pull divisions from there to man the "West-Wall" , while the Russians ate the German's lunch , moving quicker against weaker German opposition, basically what happened historically. It was never my thought , that the US/UK would say "Make to Berlin" to end the war, only that Russia would have ended the show earlier due to US/UK forces being "on the ground" on the continent , rather than "shoring up the British Empire/ and securing the "English Pond" . The Med after Africa was retaken was a sideshow/ Italy had nothing and its military power was gone after losing Africa. SO why bother invading Sicily and subsequently Italy? Land those forces in France, help the Russians win. German defended Italy on a "shoestring" because of its terrain, and Allied firepower had limited effect (witness Monte Cassino) (sp). RoundUP should have happened.

Anyway regards, I know we used to fight alot , but now I don't even recalll much of over what , and it is like my interests in military history,
the world situation and US situtation has gotten so stupid becuase of Political correctness , it dang imp0ossible to discuss this stuff honestly anymore. And that is a shame.


One last thing I am now pretty much in the camp that Communism won and took over the USA with the election Of FDR in 1933. That was when WWII started , and pretty much NSADAP Germany's fate was sealed with that issue when they elected Hitler. The NAzis were the only arch-enemies of Communism, who put up a fight and they were the last. And the US/UK bombed the place flat and let the Russians run and rape them over.
You see now why I can't talk about this stuff, Lord I even got tired of the IHR years back, too. Funny that the Russian are no longer communists but the USA is :cry:
Regards. I would probably close my account here, but maybe one day, I might care about this stuff again, IDK,
medical issues have I knocked me down badly- I can't/don't think like I used too, I think that is what has killed my interest history.

Chris -retired revisionist :milwink:
Regards, fellow US tanker

Delta Tank
Member
Posts: 2340
Joined: 16 Aug 2004 01:51
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Why no D day in 1943?

Post by Delta Tank » 06 Jul 2021 21:03

CP,

Sorry to hear you are ill.

Mike

ChristopherPerrien
Member
Posts: 7047
Joined: 26 Dec 2002 00:58
Location: Mississippi

Re: Why no D day in 1943?

Post by ChristopherPerrien » 10 Jul 2021 14:44

Thanks, I wish I could argue with you more in the spirit of past things .
Debate usually lends towards a better result for both parties, hence why we are present in a real forum.(or were)

Return to “WW2 in Western Europe & the Atlantic”